I called some places looking for a job today
and was very disturbed when I called a place
near by called The Ugly Tuna Saloona, which is
a bar and grill, and asked "Are you hiring
servers right now?" The lady that answered
said "Yes we are hiring, but we only hire
female servers." Is it just me or is this
flat out gender discrimination?

In most instances I would be deeply disturbed
by this type of discrimination but sadly, I don't
think it's being done as a compliment to women.
The name of the restaurant alone alludes to some
deliberate slight. But yes you are right that
they can't discriminate and I would certainly
bring this to their attention. Below is actually
something I just received and relates somewhat
to your experience:

House Committee Passes Paycheck Fairness
Act
On July 24, the House Education and Labor Committee
approved, 26-17, H.R. 1338, the Paycheck Fairness
Act. The committee held a hearing on the bill
on April 24, 2007 (see The Source, 4/27/07).
Sponsored by Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT), the bill
would amend a portion of the Fair Labor Standards
Act of 1938 (FLSA) (P.L. 99-239) known as the
Equal Pay Act to expand the remedies for, and
enforcement of prohibitions against, gender-based
wage discrimination. Specifically, the measure
would require employers to demonstrate that the
wage discrimination is not based upon previous “gender-based” wage
discrepancies. In addition, the measure would
add non-retaliation requirements and increase
penalties for employers who are found to have
discriminated against female hires.

The committee approved, by voice vote, a substitute
amendment by Chair George Miller (D-CA) to require
that employers provide a justifiable, non-gender
related reason for a discrepancy in wages between
male and female workers. It also would widen
the geographical area in which employees could
compare salaries and jobs as a basis of discrimination
from within the same building to within the county,
and would prohibit employer backlash against
workers who compare salaries. The amendment also
would make compensatory and punitive damages
available in private and class action Equal Pay
Act law suits.

The bill would authorize $15 million for two
new initiatives. The first would direct the Bureau
of Labor Statistics, within 18 months of the
bill’s enactment, to issue a survey of
pay data already available and subsequently ask
the government to issue new regulations for pay
data collection. The second initiative would
establish a negotiation skills training programs
for girls and women.

The committee rejected:
an amendment, 17-26, by Rep. Tom Price (R-GA)
requiring a 90-day period for the Bureau of Labor
Statistics to “undertake an informed review
of the effect [of H.R. 1338] on recruitment” of
female workers; and an amendment, 17-25,
by Rep. Price capping attorney fees for gender-related
discrimination lawsuits at $2,000 per hour. Rep.
Miller said, “Today,
we will take a critical step forward to ensure
that the Equal Pay Act lives up to its promise.
The Paycheck Fairness Act will strengthen the
Equal Pay Act and close many of the loopholes
that have allowed employers to avoid responsibility
of discriminatory pay...Any wage gap based on
gender is unacceptable, especially during these
tough economic times. By allowing wage discrimination
to continue, we hold down women and their families
while harming the American economy as a whole.
In the new global economy, those who stand in
the way of equal pay are tying one hand behind
America’s back.”

Rep. DeLauro added, “Pay equity is not
a women’s issue. It is a family issue.
And with committee approval of the Paycheck Fairness
Act, today marks one of my proudest moments in
Congress. After years of hard work, we are inches
away from finally bringing to the floor the Paycheck
Fairness Act for a vote by the full U.S. House
of Representatives. Last year, when Nancy Pelosi
broke the marble ceiling to be sworn-in as Speaker
of the House, women and young girls across the
country were inspired to know that there is no
job in this country they cannot do, and with
this legislation, we send a second message, that
when they do land that job, they will no longer
be underpaid — that we value the work women
do. We have made strides in the American workplace
during the last quarter century, but our work
is not done. Closing the wage gap is about fairness,
opportunity, and values. By ensuring pay equity
we can help families gain the resources they
need to give their children a better future — the
great promise of our American dream.”

Ranking Member Howard “Buck” McKeon
(R-CA) said, “This bill isn’t about
paycheck fairness. It’s already against
federal law to discriminate, in pay or other
employment practices, on the basis of sex, and
rightfully so. In 1963, Congress established
the Equal Pay Act, or EPA, within the Fair Labor
Standards Act. The EPA makes it illegal to pay
different wages to employees of the opposite
sex for equal work. In addition to the EPA, Congress
has enacted a comprehensive code of anti-discrimination
rules based on race, color, national origin,
religion, and sex under Title VII of the Civil
Rights Act [P.L. 88-352]. Together, these laws
protect against sex discrimination, and they
provide appropriate remedies for victims. What
we’re debating today is not whether sex
discrimination in the workplace should be permitted.
That question has been answered — we agree
that such discrimination should not be tolerated,
and that is why it is a direct violation of not
one but two federal laws. What we’re actually
debating today is whether it should be easier
for trial lawyers to cash in under the Equal
Pay Act, and whether it should be more difficult
for employers to make legitimate employment decisions
based on factors other than sex. Legitimate wage
disparity is a serious issue. Wage discrimination
is prohibited under federal law, and should be
rooted out aggressively. But if Democrats were
serious about addressing workers’ wage
concerns, there are far better ways to do it
than through another trial lawyer payday.”
— Amy